Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29422110›Full record

ArticleJournal of biomedical semantics2018

Supporting shared hypothesis testing in the biomedical domain.

Asan Agibetov, Ernesto Jiménez-Ruiz, Marta Ondrésik, Alessandro Solimando, Imon Banerjee, Giovanna Guerrini, Chiara E Catalano, Joaquim M Oliveira, Giuseppe Patanè, Rui L Reis and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of biomedical semantics, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Knowledge-Based Biomedical Data Science.Annual review of biomedical data science · 2020
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors.

Asan AgibetovItalian National Research Council, Via De Marini 6, Genoa, 16149, Italy.ORCID 0000-0003-0096-0143
Ernesto Jiménez-RuizUniversity of Oslo, Oslo, Norway.
Marta Ondrésik3B's Research Group, Biomaterials, Biodegradables and Biomimetics, Headquarters of the European Institute of Excellence on Tissue Engineering and Regenerative Medicine, University of Minho, Caldas das Taipas, Portugal.
Alessandro SolimandoUniversity of Genoa, Genoa, Italy.
Imon BanerjeeItalian National Research Council, Via De Marini 6, Genoa, 16149, Italy.
Giovanna GuerriniUniversity of Genoa, Genoa, Italy. giovanna.guerrini@unige.it.
Chiara E CatalanoItalian National Research Council, Via De Marini 6, Genoa, 16149, Italy.
Joaquim M Oliveira3B's Research Group, Biomaterials, Biodegradables and Biomimetics, Headquarters of the European Institute of Excellence on Tissue Engineering and Regenerative Medicine, University of Minho, Caldas das Taipas, Portugal.
Giuseppe PatanèItalian National Research Council, Via De Marini 6, Genoa, 16149, Italy.
Rui L Reis3B's Research Group, Biomaterials, Biodegradables and Biomimetics, Headquarters of the European Institute of Excellence on Tissue Engineering and Regenerative Medicine, University of Minho, Caldas das Taipas, Portugal.
Michela SpagnuoloItalian National Research Council, Via De Marini 6, Genoa, 16149, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPathogenesis of inflammatory diseases can be tracked by studying the causality relationships among the factors contributing to its development. We could, for instance, hypothesize on the connections of the pathogenesis outcomes to the observed conditions. And to prove such causal hypotheses we would need to have the full understanding of the causal relationships, and we would have to provide all the necessary evidences to support our claims. In practice, however, we might not possess all the background knowledge on the causality relationships, and we might be unable to collect all the evidence to prove our hypotheses.

resultsIn this work we propose a methodology for the translation of biological knowledge on causality relationships of biological processes and their effects on conditions to a computational framework for hypothesis testing. The methodology consists of two main points: hypothesis graph construction from the formalization of the background knowledge on causality relationships, and confidence measurement in a causality hypothesis as a normalized weighted path computation in the hypothesis graph. In this framework, we can simulate collection of evidences and assess confidence in a causality hypothesis by measuring it proportionally to the amount of available knowledge and collected evidences.

conclusionsWe evaluate our methodology on a hypothesis graph that represents both contributing factors which may cause cartilage degradation and the factors which might be caused by the cartilage degradation during osteoarthritis. Hypothesis graph construction has proven to be robust to the addition of potentially contradictory information on the simultaneously positive and negative effects. The obtained confidence measures for the specific causality hypotheses have been validated by our domain experts, and, correspond closely to their subjective assessments of confidences in investigated hypotheses. Overall, our methodology for a shared hypothesis testing framework exhibits important properties that researchers will find useful in literature review for their experimental studies, planning and prioritizing evidence collection acquisition procedures, and testing their hypotheses with different depths of knowledge on causal dependencies of biological processes and their effects on the observed conditions.

Indexed as

Biological OntologiesComputer GraphicsInflammationBiomedical ontologyHypothesis testingIncomplete knowledgeNetwork analysisOntology mapings

Identifiers

PMID29422110
PMCPMC5804102

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.